Master’s Thesis 2018 30 ECTS Faculty of Landscape and Society Department of International Environment and Development Studies Bruno Oliveira Martins (PhD) Professor Stig Jarle Hansen Drones, Targeted Killings and the Rhetoric of a Killable Enemy Erskine Yengoude Apiiyah Master of Science in International Relations Faculty of Landscape and Society DRONES, TARGETED KILLINGS AND THE RHETORIC OF A KILLABLE ENEMY A Reaper MQ-9 Remotely Piloted Air System (RPAS) taxis along the runway at Kandahar Air field, Afghanistan Photo Credit: Corporal Steve Follows RAF, Crown Copyright/MOD 2011] | P a g e The Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Noragric, is the international gateway for the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU). Established in 1986, Noragric’s contribution to international development lies in the interface between research, education (Bachelor, Master and PhD programmes) and assignments. The Noragric Master’s theses are the final theses submitted by students in order to fulfil the requirements under the Noragric Master’s programmes ‘International Environmental Studies’, ‘International Development Studies’ and ‘International Relations’. The findings in this thesis do not necessarily reflect the views of Noragric. Extracts from this publication may only be reproduced after prior consultation with the author and on condition that the source is indicated. For rights of reproduction or translation contact Noragric. © Erskine Yengoude Apiiyah, May 2018 [email protected] Noragric Department of International Environment and Development Studies The Faculty of Landscape and Society P.O. Box 5003 N-1432 Ås Norway Tel.: +47 67 23 00 00 Internet: https://www.nmbu.no/fakultet/landsam/institutt/noragric i | P a g e Declaration I, Erskine Yengoude Apiiyah, declare that this thesis is a result of my research investigations and findings. Sources of information other than my own have been acknowledged and a reference list has been appended. This work has not been previously submitted to any other university for award of any type of academic degree. Signature...................................... Date................................................ ii | P a g e Acknowledgements My appreciation goes to the Norwegian University of Life Sciences for admitting me into the Master programme in International Relations and providing me with the necessary tools, assistance and congenial atmosphere to make my studies successful. I am thankful to my course coordinator Ingunn Bohmann who always went an extra mile to ensure that I had a smooth progression. I cannot forget the several emails I bombarded you with and the timely manner my concerns were always addressed. The same goes to the entire staff of NORAGRIC and the personnel at the Student’s Information Centre (SiT). Special thanks go to my supervisor Bruno Oliveira Martins (PhD) of Peace Research Institute of Oslo (PRIO). Your rich interest and expertise in my area of research made every step of this work interesting. I have indeed learnt from you and have been motivated by your passion to teach and mentor. The same goes to co-supervisor Professor Stig Jarle Hansen of NMBU. Your guidance and direction to the right sources was key in producing this excellent work. Especially, introducing me to PRIO was a turn-around to this master thesis. I am thankful to my friend Richmond Baah for allowing me to experiment on him mercilessly- trying out new ideas with him and making time out of his busy schedule at UNIDO-Vienna to review my work. I believe I have been successful in transforming you from an Auditor to an expert of armed drones and targeted killings. To my brother Chester Apiiyah of GN Logistics-Ghana, I am grateful for your review though I submitted my work to you at a very short notice. Finally, I thank my wife Ernestina Anaba for believing in me and encouraging me to live my dreams. And to my son Erwin Yenpang Apiiyah, who has no idea what I write about but nevertheless will be proud to say that he has a father who is an emerging scholar. To my late parents Robert Apiiyah and Patience Asobayire, I know you will always be proud of me. May God make it easy for you wherever you are. iii | P a g e Abstract In the context of the international fight against terrorism, nations continue to target and kill people suspected of being terrorists or associated with terrorist networks. This war on terror has largely been driven by remotely piloted drones which is now a weapon of choice for western democracies. Although the legitimacy of targeted killing missions continues to be debated, these nations continue to make public justifications for eliminating suspected terrorists. The aim of this thesis was therefore to understand how western democracies framed their adversaries as targetable and killable as part of the global war on terror. Using the enemy image theory and US, Israel and UK as case studies, I explored the political discourse of these countries to understand how their political actors have justified suspected terrorists as killable targets. At the end of the study, my findings revealed that politicians use discursive devices that identify and polarize individuals and groups. The means of polarization involved the use of words that create a general divide between the self and the ‘Other’. Words that were degrading were peculiar to the ‘enemy’ whiles the complimentary imagery addressed the self or the state. Secondly, the political actors advanced the rhetoric to the projection of a threat that is existential and imminent in nature. The threat was framed in extra-ordinary terms out of normal politics such that, the threat situation required exceptional measures that included the killing of suspected terrorists. Finally, political actors emphasized the need and justifiable grounds for which the ‘enemy’ must be targeted and killed. This justification to kill the enemy was found to be normalized through the construction of the enemy in the political discourse. Keywords: Drones, Targeted Killing, Enemy and Western Democracies. iv | P a g e Contents Declaration .................................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................... iii Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................ iv 1.0 Chapter One: Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................................. 2 1.2 Research Aim and Research Question ................................................................................................ 4 1.3.1 Drone ........................................................................................................................................... 4 1.3.2 Targeted Killing ............................................................................................................................ 5 1.3.3 Western Democracies .................................................................................................................. 5 1.3.4 The ‘Enemy’ .................................................................................................................................. 6 1.4 Delimitations ....................................................................................................................................... 6 1.5 Outline of Study .................................................................................................................................. 6 2.0 Chapter: Two Literature Review ............................................................................................................. 7 2.1 The legal Debate ................................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 The Proliferation of Drone Technology ............................................................................................... 9 2.3 The Effectiveness of TKs .................................................................................................................... 10 2.4 The Moral Debate ............................................................................................................................. 11 2.5 The Debate on the Impact and Accountability of Targeted Killing ................................................... 12 2.6 The Constructivist Argument ............................................................................................................ 13 3.0 Chapter Three: Methodology and Research Design ............................................................................. 15 3.1 Critical Discourse Analysis ................................................................................................................. 15 3.1.1 Qualitative Research .................................................................................................................. 15 3.1.2 Critical Discourse Analysis as a Method ..................................................................................... 16 3.2 Research Design ...............................................................................................................................